Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KidSnide" data-source="post: 5087075" data-attributes="member: 54710">Ariosto, I feel like we're talking past each other.  Just to be clear, I agree that a sandbox style game with a neutral arbiter GM is a fun and valid way of playing D&D.  I never said anything to the contrary, and I don't think I implied anything to the contrary.  I'm certainly not trying to deny that this is Gygax's style and that it's been around for a real long time.  I've played in quite a few of those games and quite enjoyed some.  So, when we have the following back and forth:I'm denying the alternative.  Of course, a GM can be a neutral arbiter -- I never said otherwise.  What I'm saying is that a GM can also act as an editor and a director and this doesn't make him not a GM.  (and, certainly, the DMG2 seems to agree.)Of course, we've read it!  (Well, at least some of us have read it.)  I wouldn't have presented it as an example of Storytelling techniques, otherwise.  In particular, I recommend the sections on:Classic Story StructureTurning PointsBranchingCooperative ArcsRecurring CharactersPredestinedVignettesI'll also note the more generic sections on Introducing Player Suggestions and What Your Players Want, which I think are written from a story telling perspective, but are probably equally applicable to a sandbox game.Yes and no.  If a PC makes a well-informed (or knowingly ill-informed decision) decision, then I'll almost always allow the consequences to take place.  I think an important role of a GM is to make sure that the PC's decisions have intentionality.  The players need enough context so that they have a fair chance of understanding the potential consequences of their actions.  Otherwise, they are just acting randomly with (perceived) random results.  Therefore, if a player tries to do something that suggests to me that the player lacks understanding that his or her character would have, I'll tell the player what his or her character knows and give the player a chance to reconsider the action.  But I don't think of that as being a part of the "story telling" style -- it's just a part of GMing.But there are rare occasions in which guidance will be more story directed.  For example, I have two PCs with a romantic interest in one another.  One character gave the other a very thoughtful gift, but then said something stupid which made the recipient uninterested in speaking to the giver for quite some time.  It was a delightful and organic misunderstanding.  It was also very convenient because the recipient was going to be missing the next 6 or 7 sessions while the other PCs were planning on traveling to a new city.  So, when the giver tried to correct the misunderstanding, I assumed my "director" role and told him not to fix it.  It was much better narratively if the recipient character spent the next few sessions off in a huff.But, as a general matter, good story telling GMing isn't about interfering with player choice.  Once the PCs have made a decision, a good GM needs to respect it (at least most of the time).  The main way in which a story telling GM gets involved is by deciding what the adventure is, while allowing the players to decide how to play it.  War of the Burning Sky is a good example of this, as SteveC discussed above at <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/271645-what-great-storytelling-dm-looks-like-8.html#post5086789" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/271645-what-great-storytelling-dm-looks-like-8.html#post5086789</a>.That's going to depend on the game, of course.  For a general discussion, see the Branching section in the DMG2.  The Aalterdam games at AnonyCon are also good examples of this.  It's a two round format in which the first round sets up the scenario and the second around allows the PCs to determine the direction that the world takes until the next convention.  So, for example, the first round might put the PCs on a quest seeking out the Fountain of Youth.  In the second round, they find it (they have to overcome obstacles first, but they're certainly expected to succeed) and have the difficult inter-PC discussion of what to do with it, with profound implications for the game world.  (Because of those decisions, there is a city state now ruled by an effectively immortal former-PC.)  It's a convention game, but it's an example of how strong GM direction puts the PCs in a position in which their decisions have a major impact on the game world.-KS</blockquote>

Verification